Since the post-war boom, American-style capitalism has become the dominant Western model. Its more right-wing figures have shaped our extreme economic realities, with the devastating psychological and economic effects of Reaganism and Thatcherism. Deregulation, privatisation, lower taxes, and decreased social spending have led to a failed economic experiment that sounds appealing on paper but neglects the human element—selfishness and greed. We’ve reached a turning point towards an oligarchic hyper-capitalism led by the U.S. and increasingly emulated by Australia.
Consider the trends of the last few decades. Australia and the U.S. have seen strong economic growth since the 1980s, yet wages have stagnated for decades. Productivity has soared, but compensation has not kept pace. Why are we so focused on increasing productivity if the rewards don’t benefit us? Because productivity is key to remaining competitive in the workforce. While some of this can be attributed to innate intellect, advances in technology have allowed generalised productivity to boom, growing an economy that increasingly rewards us less for our hard work and siphons profits into private holdings. Healthcare and housing costs are higher, while wages remain stagnant. Unfortunately, indicators of quality of life—critical to our overall well-being—are often ignored. Spoiler alert: these indicators have been trending downward in the U.S. for the past decade.
So, why am I uneasy about this headset? In its current form, it’s not necessarily a productivity device. It looks a bit silly, and it’s easy to laugh at. Unironically, it’s impressive technology, but let’s face it—it’s still very much a tech demo. The real-world ramifications of a device like this won’t be felt until the form factor is perfected and the price point drops to allow widespread adoption. So, what does the perfect form factor look like? It’s currently unwieldy, large, and obtrusive. It can only trend one way—smaller, less obtrusive, more integrated. Just as it took less than a decade for smartphones to become essential productivity tools—without one, you risk being economically disadvantaged—this new AR/VR device may soon follow suit.
I’m not a fan of Musk, but something he said in an interview about Neuralink opened my mind. You might not like the idea of an implant because it raises the question: would I then be a cyborg? Part human, part machine? Musk provocatively asks us to reflect on our relationship with our devices. Could you genuinely live your life as you do now without your smartphone or computer? Most of us are already part human, part machine. While you might find this sentiment distasteful, accepting it as uncomfortable truth can help you understand why Apple’s latest product category is worth considering. It may look like a silly ski mask today, but tomorrow’s version could resemble sunglasses, and eventually, we might see some kind of neural implant or brain-reading device that communicates with external technology. Perhaps these will serve different needs or be integrated into a single package.
Whatever the final product looks like, if you have one, you’ll be economically rewarded. You’ll get more done, more efficiently. If you don’t have it, you may find yourself relegated to a lower economic stratum. I suspect this will occur in my or my children’s lifetime—not immediately, but soon enough. If smartphones are almost irresistible for how they enhance our ability to engage with the modern world, implants or brain-reading tech will be that on steroids. If you think you’ll have a choice to simply say ‘no,’ it’s worth examining your privilege—because, given the chance to gain a significant economic advantage, someone with very little would do a lot to obtain it.
Steve Jobs once described the computer as a bicycle for the mind—human beings on bicycles are the most efficient means of transport. Musk sees implants or brain-reading devices as a way to increase our interface efficiency with the technology we already use. Thus, a person with an implant or brain-reading device could become the most economically productive version of themselves. AR/VR is an historically difficult product category, littered with failures from tech giants. Yet I believe these companies see it as necessary R&D for a future where this category might bridge the gap to brain-computer interfaces, even while serving as entertaining devices in the meantime.
Apple Vision Pro is a testing ground for the future, as is META, as is Neuralink - and these are just the name brands. I don’t say this as a conspiracy theoriser because it’s not a conspiracy. It’s not a secret. It’s simple economics. It is the inevitable end in a system that holds efficiency and productivity above all else. When implants or brain readers become the number one way to remain competitively productive and they find the right price point they will be widely adopted.
But then comes the question of AI. What role will artificial intelligence play in all of this. In the eyes of Neural-link, it ends with a symbiosis of AI and the human brain. A utopic melding that treats neurological disorders and make the idea of ‘genius’ an old fashioned notion. Imagine a scenario where genius IQ is sold on a subscription fee model. But what if singularity happens first. What if some form of AI beats us to the punch. What if we’re made redundant before we even get a chance to be competitive? It’s a weird time to be making predictions of the future. I come with no answers, and only to pose questions. In fact, it’s probable the dunning kruger effect has left me thinking I’ve asked the right questions or postulated in the right direction when more than likely I haven’t even scratched the surface.
We’ve been raised in a world that measures GDP and stock market growth as key indicators for positive growth, figures that tells us very little about the quality of that growth or who it’s going too. A world where productivity is king and competitive edge in the market is survival. Natural, social and human capital is on the decline, and along comes the pre-birth of a product category that might one day become ubiquitous to economic survival. The economic system that will see nations competing for drinking water before reconsidering the modus operandi is not operating in your best interest. It is a product category that will not improve quality of life for most, but rather, in it’s end game will simply turn you into a more efficient economic unit.
On all fronts, technological, moral and societal - whatever makes us human will have to defended in the near future.
